5 ms·

Why does there need to be a metric? People with management experience can decide these things based on intuition. It's practically impossible to quantify anythi

by rmk 4y ago

Why does there need to be a metric? People with management experience can decide these things based on intuition. It's practically impossible to quantify anything in this industry, but 'data-driven decisionmaking' is fetishized to the extreme. Ultimately it just becomes another buzzword and method for people with little or no experience to override people with experience. Phrasing the whole discussion in terms of 'metrics' to justify the common-sense conclusion that junior people need more direct supervision is clearly sugarcoating it for junior recipients for whom the message is intended.

yellowapple 4y ago
> Why does there need to be a metric? Ask Facebook. > People with management experience can decide these things based on intuition. It's practically impossible to quantify anything in this industry, but 'data-driven decisionmaking' is fetishized to the extreme. The answer to "it's practically impossible to quantify anything in this industry" is not "therefore we should just give up and rely on managerial intuition with zero accountability or measurement", but rather "therefore we should improve our ability to quantify things and pair that quantification and measurement with human judgment and oversight".
quickthrower2 4y ago
I agree and I’ve played Goldharts game enough to be fucked off with it all. Sure track bug counts etc. but keep that stuff lightweight as possible on the day to day.
deelly 4y ago
> these things based on intuition And these people never ever mentioned using of intuition during making decisions because... because no one believe that using intuition is actually working?
surgical_fire 4y ago
> common-sense conclusion that junior people need more direct supervision is clearly sugarcoating it for junior recipients for whom the message is intended. I see this being repeated ad-nauseam. I don't really buy that at all. I have seen junior employees that performed and evolved fine on remote settings, on teams that had effective remote collaboration. IMO, this is a lie that people that really miss working from offices grasping at straws to muddy the conversation with some kind of plausible deniability.
- smarmgoblin 4y ago
  I believe it might be predicated on some mythical junior engineer who would excel in-person but finds themselves completely helpless outside of the earshot of a senior engineer. Those who want to figure stuff out will do it. That’s largely what this job is
joshstrange 4y ago
> Phrasing the whole discussion in terms of 'metrics' to justify the common-sense conclusion that junior people need more direct supervision is clearly sugarcoating it for junior recipients for whom the message is intended. This line of reasoning will never not make my blood boil. "Well of course it's not data driven but we have to pretend it is for the juniors while the seniors know the truth", what absolute hogwash. Say what you mean or I'll assume what you believe what you say. Yout don't get to have it both ways. They said it's based on data so you don't get to pretend it was intuition (on top of which the people exercising the "intuition" have a vested interest in WFO).

by rmk 4y ago

yellowapple 4y ago

> Why does there need to be a metric? Ask Facebook. > People with management experience can decide these things based on intuition. It's practically impossible to quantify anything in this industry, but 'data-driven decisionmaking' is fetishized to the extreme. The answer to "it's practically impossible to quantify anything in this industry" is not "therefore we should just give up and rely on managerial intuition with zero accountability or measurement", but rather "therefore we should improve our ability to quantify things and pair that quantification and measurement with human judgment and oversight".

quickthrower2 4y ago

I agree and I’ve played Goldharts game enough to be fucked off with it all. Sure track bug counts etc. but keep that stuff lightweight as possible on the day to day.

deelly 4y ago

> these things based on intuition And these people never ever mentioned using of intuition during making decisions because... because no one believe that using intuition is actually working?

surgical_fire 4y ago

> common-sense conclusion that junior people need more direct supervision is clearly sugarcoating it for junior recipients for whom the message is intended. I see this being repeated ad-nauseam. I don't really buy that at all. I have seen junior employees that performed and evolved fine on remote settings, on teams that had effective remote collaboration. IMO, this is a lie that people that really miss working from offices grasping at straws to muddy the conversation with some kind of plausible deniability.

smarmgoblin 4y ago
I believe it might be predicated on some mythical junior engineer who would excel in-person but finds themselves completely helpless outside of the earshot of a senior engineer. Those who want to figure stuff out will do it. That’s largely what this job is

joshstrange 4y ago

> Phrasing the whole discussion in terms of 'metrics' to justify the common-sense conclusion that junior people need more direct supervision is clearly sugarcoating it for junior recipients for whom the message is intended. This line of reasoning will never not make my blood boil. "Well of course it's not data driven but we have to pretend it is for the juniors while the seniors know the truth", what absolute hogwash. Say what you mean or I'll assume what you believe what you say. Yout don't get to have it both ways. They said it's based on data so you don't get to pretend it was intuition (on top of which the people exercising the "intuition" have a vested interest in WFO).